Letters to the Editor
-
I would also like to remind readers that here in the U.S.
we have had our own tribal sexual abuse scandals.
-
How awful
It is unbelievable that this occurred, no matter the race of the victim or perpetrators. Culture doesn't cut it for a mitigating factor, child-rape is unacceptable; and she didn't have to be moved to a non-aboriginal household for her rapists to be punished, so I don't see the connection there. Surely there must be many good people among the aboriginal population who could have been awarded custody of this girl, if the first ones couldn't or didn't protect her.
-
social workers concluded that it was wrong to put "an indigenous child with white foster parents."
Yes, just like here in the US assholes like AKA Smith state it is wrong to put children in the care of fathers.
-
Obnoxious Anonymous,
I see you are your usual lying self. I never said it was wrong to put children with fathers and you know it. I just said I doubt that you are an appropriate father.
-
American tribes...
I would also like to remind readers that here in the U.S. we have had our own tribal sexual abuse scandals.
AKA Smith
Catholics are not an indigenous tribe; they came with Columbus, so I guess you are refering to the tribes of Congress--Mark Foley and his ilk.
-
AKA Smith, in the various discussions of stranger danger and child molestation you have repeatedly said
that children have more to fear from fathers than from mothers, more to fear from men than from women, when the statistics clearly demonstrate that more children are harmed by either mom or mom's new boyfriend or husband than from dad or dad's new wife or girlfriend.
And considering how you have agreed you would give up your son to a woman that claimed he had raped him, and how disingenuously you tried to not answer the questions that many posed of you regarding that, it's unclear how you were more a fit mother than I a fit father.
Or do I have you wrong, and you back a rebuttable presumption of joint shared custody?
Because if you don't, then don't bother your piggish squealing that you don't try to separate children from their fathers.
-
To Anonymous (kid attacking) Troll on December 10, 2007 10:34 PM
AKA Smith is right, you are complete slime, and you should not be allowed anywhere near children.
On Thursday, November 15, 2007 07:25 PM on the "Are kids worth the cost?" thread, you wrote:
"Hey PetBoy, what kind of kids can a sock puppet have?
Are they little anklets? Or just 1/4 crew?"
Attacking somebody's kids is the sleaziest thing a person can do, and I am going to remind everyone that you attacked mine.
Obviously your ex-wife saw how sleazy you are, and got her children as far away from away you as possible.
Also you are an idiot. Go through every one of AKA Smith's letters (unlike you, AKA Smith allows her letters to be archived), and you will never find a line where she said that kids should never go to the father. However, no kid should be left with you.
-
Wasn't there a rape?
Is it that this child rape isn't important, or is it simply easier to pick an unsubstantiated fight with AKASmith than truly contemplate the crime?
On that note, this crime stuns me speechless. I just don't even know how to process it. That poor, poor girl.
-
trauma
abounds
-
Don't forget...
...that the judge is female.
Bit of a setback there for ya girls eh?
-
another great moment for multiculturalism
this judge is apotheosis of multicultural thinking. the anti-racist mindset of the anglo-american world has now reached the point where minorities cannot be held accountable for their actions due to whatever historical or contemporary grievances they might have. anti-racists become racist in effect
-
the judge must be a maniac
No person in his right mind would agree that a ten-year-old legally capable of consenting to have sex.Only the morally depraved pervert would sexually take advantage of a child.That said, a judge enabling those offenders to get away with the outrageous crime is even more pernicious and disgusting.
-
Actions speak louder than words
What the judge said: 'All of you have to understand that you cannot have sex with a girl under 16. If you do, you are breaking the law, and if you are found out, then you will be brought to court and could end up in jail.'
What the offenders understood: If you have sex with a girl WAY under the age of consent and you're brought to court, you don't go to jail.
Question: What are these 9 men going to do the next time they find some jail-bait they can bully into sex? What's your guess?
-
Regarding "jail-bait"
Question: What are these 9 men going to do the next time they find some jail-bait they can bully into sex? What's your guess?
The term "jail-bait" implies the girl is putting herself out there on purpose trying to "bait" innocent men so they will go to jail. It's a nasty term that implies that even 10-year-old females are out to destroy men with their eeeevil and irresistible sexuality. It also removes responsibility from the rapists.
How about asking "What are those 9 men going to do the next time they find some child they can rape?"
-
Sickening
A horrific collision between continued discrimination against the Aborigine population and political correctness run amuck.
Given all the atrocities visited upon the aborigines in the past, you would think the judiciary would know better.
-
Meanwhile in the U.S.,
a couple of weeks ago, an 11-year-old girl had sex with two boys aged 9 and 10. They were charged with statutory rape and she was charged with, that's right, nothing. The point being that statutory rape laws sometimes produce some odd results, like making everyone involved both perpetrator and victim, both rapist and raped.
-
Blackpaw is Right
This sad story has more to do with white guilt and multiculturalism than misogyny or chauvinism.
The main article asks the question whether the attackers of a white ten year old would get off so easily. Fair enough. But you should also ask whether nine white Australians would get off with a slap on the wrist after such an attack. The answer to both questions is no.
Sexual and domestic abuse of women and girls is rampant in Aboriginal society. It is a HUGE problem. Beacuse of white guilt over historic suppression of Aboriginal culture and Australia's strong pc movement (just as strong as that in the States), it is very difficult to even talk about the issue sometimes, let alone do something about it. White Australians are fearful of being labelled racist and ethnocentric in legal situations involving Aborigines-- to the point of being unable to apply normative western standards even in cases like this one. The dynamic is compounded by the tendancy to blame western culture for any and all problems with indigenous people. To suggest that historically patriachal and repressive (to women) Aboriginal culture is as much or more to blame for high rates of domestic abuse than alcoholism and ennui caused by white political and economic oppression is anethema.
This is an extreme example, but less extreme situations involving the same issues and feelings happen every day. Rather than punish offenders or unequivocally condemn such behaviors, a "teaching" attitude is adopted, and even that has to be parsed for appropriate cultural sensitivity.